Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 11668-08
Original file (11668-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS

2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5700

 

BUG
Docket No: 11668-08
3 September 2009

 

This is in reference to your application for correction of your
naval record pursuant to the provisions of title 10 of the
United States Code, section 1552.

A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval
Records, sitting in executive session, considered your .
application on 2 September 2009. Your allegations of error and
injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative
regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of
this Board. Documentary material considered by the Board
consisted of your application, together with all material
submitted in support thereof, your naval and medical records,
and applicable statutes, regulations and policies.

After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire
record, the Board found that the evidence submitted was
insufficient to establish the existence of probable material
error or injustice. The Board found that you entered active
duty in the Marine Corps on 10 October 1961. You received
nonjudicial punishment on three occasions and three summary
courts-martial. Your offenses included five instances of
unauthorized absence totaling 39 days and failure to obey a
lawful order. On 15 June 1965, you were given a letter of
indebtedness. On 26 February 1966, you received a general

discharge at the end of your active obligated service, and were
net recommended for reenlistment.
Characterization of service is based in part on conduct marks
assigned on a periodic basis. Your overall conduct mark
average was 3.8. A 4.0 overall conduct average was required
for a fully honorable characterization of service.

The Board, in its review of your entire record, carefully
weighed all potential mitigation, such as your youth.
Nevertheless, the Board concluded that these factors were not
sufficient to warrant upgrading your general discharge because
of your misconduct and insufficiently high overall conduct mark
average. In view of the above, your application has been
denied. The names and votes of the members of the panel will
be furnished upon request.

It is regretted that the circumstances of your case are such
that favorable action cannot be taken, You are entitled to
have the Board reconsider its decision upon submission of new
and material evidence or other matter not previously considered
by the Board. In this regard, it is important to keep in mind
that a presumption of regularity attaches to all official
records. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an
official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to
demonstrate the existence of probable material error or
injustice.

Sincerely,

W. DEAN PFED'R
Executive Da r

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 10761-08

    Original file (10761-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your , application on 20 August 2009. After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found that the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the existence of probable material error or injustice. On 1 September 1972 and 1 March 1973, _ you received an adverse mark in military behavior.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 03808-08

    Original file (03808-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 14 January 2009. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. On 3 January 1989, a substance abuse evaluation diagnosed you as being alcohol dependent and recommended treatment, which you declined, and...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 00907-09

    Original file (00907-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant upgrading your discharge given your two SCM’s, conviction by SPCM, and failure to attain the required average in cohduct. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 10516-08

    Original file (10516-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 29 September 2009. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 08999-08

    Original file (08999-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 22 July 2009. After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the existence of probable material error or injustice. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable material error...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 10129-08

    Original file (10129-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of, Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 25 August 2009. At the time of your service, a conduct average of 4.0 was required for a fully honorable characterization of service. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable material error or injustice.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 00014-09

    Original file (00014-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 30 September 2009. Your allegations of error and injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found that the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the existence of probable material error or...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 10266-08

    Original file (10266-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. You enlisted in the Navy and began a period of active duty on 29 December 1965 at age 17. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record,.the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable material error or injustice.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 06912-08

    Original file (06912-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. On 22 December 1976, you received a general discharge based on your average conduct marks. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable material error or injustice.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 05210-08

    Original file (05210-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 3 February 2009. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable...